The Arab 'Right of Return' to Israel

Discrediting the libel of an Israeli "original sin" against the Palestinian Arabs.

A media and propaganda campaign has been under way since the Annapolis "peace" conference to legitimate the longstanding demands made on behalf of the Palestinian "Arab refugees" -- meaning in practice the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of refugees -- from the 1948 Arab-Israel war of 60 years ago, for their return to their ancestral homes and the return of all their ancestors' former land and property in what is now Israel.

The Palestinian National Authority headed by Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Liberation Organization founded by Yasser Arafat have always made this demand a sine qua non for "peace" with Israel, as do all of the Palestinian terrorist-political groups (Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, etc. etc.). And the Palestinian Arab leadership continues to stand by this demand today, promising their supporters that they will never agree to "peace" without its acceptance by Israel.

An example of the current media blitz on behalf of this "right of return" demand is an op-ed by Nir Rosen a reporter who has covered the Islamic world for many of the United States' leading media organs, in the Washington Post ("Scapegoats in an Unwelcoming Land," Sunday, December 16, 2007). Mr. Rosen writes:

"the rights of the Palestinian refugees have been ignored for six decades by a world that has wished them away. But the Middle East will never know peace or stability until they are granted justice. In 1948-49, around the conflict that Israelis refer to as their War of Independence and that Palestinians call the Catastrophe, some 750,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed to make way for the creation of the Jewish state. In 1967, during the Six-Day War, 400,000 Palestinians were expelled by the Israeli military, according to Amnesty International."

A similar polemic by one Ghada Ageel, who describes herself as "a third-generation Palestinian refugee [who] grew up in the Khan Yunis refugee camp in Gaza and teaches Middle Eastern politics at the University of Exeter in Britain," appeared in the Dec.1, 2007 issue of the Los Angles Times: Ms. Ageel avers:

"sixty years ago, my grandparents lived in the beautiful village of Beit Daras, a few kilometers north of Gaza. They were farmers and owned hundreds of acres of land. But in 1948, in the first Arab-Israeli war, many people lost their lives defending our village from the Zionist militias. In the end, with their crops and homes burning, the villagers fled. My family eventually made its way to what became the refugee camp of Khan Yunis in Gaza . We were hit hard by poverty, humiliation and disease. We became refugees, queuing for tents, food and assistance, while the state of Israel was established on the ruins of my family's property and on the ruins of hundreds of other Palestinian villages. . . I raise this story today. . . to help convey the deep-seated fears of Palestinian refugees that we will be asked to exonerate Israel for its actions and to relinquish our right to return home.

That cannot be allowed to happen. All refugees have the right to return. This is an individual right, long recognized in international law, that cannot be negotiated away." .

What is wrong with these demands? Just about everything. Here are only a few of the reasons why they are unjust, ill-intentioned and grounded in deceit:

The Palestinian Arabs were the primary aggressors in the 1948 war, not innocent victims of the "Zionists."

First and foremost, the Palestinian Arabs were the primary aggressors in the 1948 war, not innocent victims of the "Zionists" as their spokesmen and advocates claim. The Palestinian Arab guerilla-terrorists used very brutal tactics indeed in 1947-48 to achieve their leaders' publicly affirmed goal of "driving the Jews into the sea."

Within 24 hours of the passage of the United Nations General Assembly partition resolution of November 29, 1947, which the Palestinians' political leadership rejected, a civilian bus carrying Jewish passengers were attacked by Palestinian Arab guerilla-terrorists and five of its passengers were massacred. Two days later, the Jewish Commercial Center in Jerusalem was burned to the ground.

Soon terrorist and guerilla attacks on Jewish villages and urban neighborhoods were being carried out all across Palestine. Few if any Jewish communities were spared attack. In Jaffa, to take a fairly typical example, the minaret of the Hassan Bek mosque was used by the Palestinian Arab guerillas as a sniper post to direct random fire at Jewish civilians in nearby Tel Aviv, taking a heavy toll in lives over several months. The attacks on Jewish-operated vehicles along the roads were especially vicious, resulting in many casualties and effectively closing all of the major roads in Palestine to Jewish traffic.

As a result, many Jewish communities developed severe shortages of food, fuel, and medicines. The Jerusalem areas'100,000 Jewish inhabitants were especially hard-hit by the Palestinian Arabs' siege warfare. By May 15, 1948, after five and a half months of Palestinian guerilla-terrorist attacks, but before six Arab states had begun their massive invasion of Palestine-Israel, 2,500 Jews had already been killed, half of them civilians, and thousands more had been wounded.

After the Arab states' invasion began on May 15, the Palestinian Arab "irregulars" helped the Arab armies in every way they could: they blew up Jerusalem's main water pumping station, leaving its inhabitants without regular water as well as food supplies; continued to ambush Jewish traffic on the roads; acted as guides to Arab troops; and held down defensive positions, thereby freeing the Arab regular armies for offensive operations against their Jewish neighbors. By the time the war ended, about 6,000 Jews had been killed, including approximately 2,000 civilians-nearly one per cent of the Jewish population of Palestine/Israel.

In order to defend the country's 650,000 Jewish inhabitants, whose villages and urban neighborhoods were scattered amongst Arab ones, from annihilation by the combined Palestinian Arab and Arab states' onslaught, the Palestinian Jewish defense militias (just in the process of evolving into the Israeli army) were forced to capture Palestinian villages that served as bases of operation for the guerilla-terrorist attackers. It is true that when the defense militias entered some Palestinian villages in order to drive out or capture the guerilla-terrorists, much of the Palestinian Arab civilian population also fled from these villages. But this was hardly the fault of the Israelis.

The Arab Palestinian guerillas did not wear uniforms or distinguish themselves in any way from the Arab civilian population, among whom they lived and from whom they were recruited. As a result, there was no way that the Israeli soldiers could drive the guerillas out of these villages without adversely affecting their noncombatant relatives and neighbors

Even so, the Israeli forces' counter-guerilla operations, unavoidable for self-defense as they were, were not even the immediate cause of the "exodus" of most Palestinian Arabs from the areas that became Israel in 1948. Many Arab leaders as well as ordinary Palestinian Arabs have confirmed the role of the Palestinian Arab leadership and the governments of the Arab states in causing the mass evacuation of much of the Arab population from what is now Israel. A prime example is none other than the present head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen). Abbas wrote in March 1976 that

"The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny, but instead they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, imposed upon them a political and ideological blockade and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live in Eastern Europe."

Another well-informed Arab politician, Khaled al-Azm, a former Syrian Prime Minister, states in his memoirs published in 1973 that

"Since 1948, it is we who have demanded the return of the refugees, while it is we who made them leave. We brought disaster upon a million Arab refugees by inviting them and bringing pressure on them to leave. We have accustomed them to begging...we have participated in lowering their morale and social level...Then we exploited them in executing crimes of murder, arson and throwing stones upon men, women and children...all this in the service of political purposes..."

And Mahmud Al-Habbash, a columnist for the official PA paper, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, has confirmed that the Arabs left Israel in 1948 only after Arab leaders persuaded them to do so by promising them a speedy return to their homes in Palestine; as Habbash puts it,

the leaders and the elites promised us at the beginning of the 'Catastrophe' [the establishment of Israel and the creation of refugee problem] in 1948, that the duration of the exile will not be long, and that it will not last more than a few days or months, and afterwards the refugees will return to their homes, which most of them did not leave only until they put their trust in those 'Arkuvian' promises made by the leaders and the political elites. Afterwards, days passed, months, years and decades, and the promises were lost with the strain of the succession of events..." [Term "Arkuvian," is after Arkuv - a figure from Arab tradition - who was known for breaking his promises and for his lies. Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, December 13, 2006].

As for Mr. Rosen's claim that 'in 1967, during the Six-Day War, 400,000 Palestinians were expelled by the Israeli military," for which he gives "Amnesty International" as his source, it is true that an AI report dated March 3, 2004 contains a single sentence claiming that "In . . .1967, Palestinian refugees were expelled out of their homes by force.". But the report does not give the figures cited by Mr. Rosen ("400,000") or indeed any figures at all for the refugees of the 1967 war. Even more to the point, it provides no documentation or other supporting evidence whatsoever for its expulsion claim. Nor have we seen any such evidence relating to an expulsion of Palestinians in 1967 elsewhere.

The claims of many of the present-day "refugees" to be Palestinians are dubious.

Even the claims of many of the present-day "refugees" to be Palestinians are dubious. In her painstakingly researched study From Time Immemorial, Joan Peters points out that UNWRA defines any Arab who lived in Palestine for a minimum of only two years before Israel became independent in 1948, and who left Israeli territory at that time, plus all Arabs descended from such individuals to the end of time. As Ms. Peters documents at great length, tens if not hundreds of thousands of Arabs immigrated to Palestine under the British Mandate administration of 1918-1948, attracted by the massive economic development and infrastructure improvements introduced into Palestine by the Jewish "settlers" and the British administration.

Thus many of the "Palestinians" not only have never lived in Palestine themselves, but are fairly distant descendants of people who lived their only briefly before 1948, having been born elsewhere in the Arab world -- for the most part, in the Hauran region of Syria. Even more registration of phony refugees occurred because of the United Nations Works and Relief Agency (UNWRA) practice of relying solely on the claims of self-professed refugees to determine refugee status, without attempting to verify their claims.

Equally dubious are the claims of so many of the refugees to be the heirs of former Palestinian landowners. All of the claims to ancestral land inheritances could not possibly be true. Very few Palestinian Arabs actually left behind valuable property when they left Israeli territory in 1948. Prior to Israel's independence very few Arabs possessed clear and unencumbered legal title to land in Palestine. Vast areas of the country were the property of the "state" (originally the Turkish government). Other land was held in common by villages.

Much of what land as was privately owned by Arabs prior to 1948 was included in vast latifundia owned by a few dozen wealthy "effendi" (aristocratic) families, some of whom did not even live in Palestine. Most Palestinian Arabs were tenant farmers, landless laborers, or Bedouin nomads. And such farms as were owned by Arab smallholders were usually hard-scrabble affairs on sandy, unproductive soil, which enabled their cultivators at most to eke out a bare living. Their owners were heavily indebted to money-lenders or large landlords.

Claims of massive poverty, deprivation and suffering on the part of the Palestinian Arab refugees are largely false. For sixty years four generations of Palestinian refugees or alleged refugees have had all or most of their housing, food, education through college and graduate school, medical care and social services provided to them for free by UNWRA. No Americans or Europeans have benefited from such a generous and all-encompassing welfare state.

On top of UNWRA assistance, the Palestinian Arabs also receive a total of over a billion dollars a year in aid from other United Nations agencies, the United States, the European Community, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States, and Iran. There have been no tents in the "refugee camps" (actually towns or urban neighborhoods) since the 1950s; the "refugees" live in apartments or houses, many of them as large and with the same amenities as apartments and houses in the United States and Europe.

For example, after the fighting in Jenin in 2002, when the Israel Defense Forces were compelled by repeated terrorist massacres to enter the Jenin "refugee camp" in order to remove the large terrorist base of operations there, the United Nations rebuilt the houses that had been destroyed in the fighting gratis for the Palestinians, hiring a British company to build English style townhouses with central heating and all modern amenities. However, at one point, the construction was halted by armed Palestinian Arabs with guns, who invaded the UNWRA housing office and demanded that bigger houses be built for them. They claimed that their original houses that were destroyed in the fighting were bigger than the townhouses designed by the British construction firm; they had been more like ranch houses.

Even Mr. Rosen, while purporting to describe the dire poverty and misery of the refugees in Lebanese "camps," lets slip an inconsistency: he observes that

"the term 'refugee camp' summons up images of tents and squalor, but Nahr-el Bared, like many of its counterparts elsewhere in Lebanon, had been a thoroughly urban camp [sic], with low-slung apartment buildings. It even had soothing views of the Mediterranean."

Of course, non-refugee multimillionaires would gladly pay millions of dollars for a plot of land and a house with such "soothing views!" In short, Palestinian refugeeism is something of a racket.

The "return" of four million alleged "refugees," would result in a massive internal insurgency against the state, occupation by hostile Arab armies and the probable extermination of its Jewish population.

The international community has not recognized or enforced a "right of return" for most of the very numerous non-Palestinian refugee communities throughout the world. The list of refugee populations who have been forced from their homelands and whose lands have been seized without compensation because of wars and revolutions within the past 100 years is endless. The more than 850,000 Jews who have either been expelled or fled from Arab and other Muslim countries since the Arab world initiated hostilities against the Jews of Israel-Palestine in 1947; the fifteen million Germans expelled from Pomerania, Silesia, Bohemia and Moravia by Poland and Czechoslovakia after World War II; the two million ethnic Greeks and Turks who were expelled from either Greece or Turkey in a "population exchange" administered by the League of Nations in 1922; the additional 200,000 Greeks who were expelled from northern Cyprus by the Turkish military invasion in 1974; the millions of Hindus who fled the newly created Muslim state of "Pakistan" and the millions of Muslims who fled what remained of India to Pakistan following the partition of India in 1947; the millions of Russians who fled Russia after the Communist takeover of that country in 1917 for other European countries or the United States; and the millions of Cubans, Vietnamese and Laotians who fled their homelands for the United States after the Communist take-overs of these countries, have all been denied repatriation, the return of the vast amounts of property they were forced to leave behind, or even compensation for their lost property.

Why should the Palestinian Arabs be considered a uniquely special case, with more rights than other refugees from wars and/or revolutions?

Last but certainly not least, implementation of the "right of return" demand for Palestinian Arabs would force the relocation of millions of people, most of them refugees or the descendants of refugees themselves, who have been resettled in the course of 60 years on land that is claimed by the Palestinian Arabs. The "return" of four million alleged "refugees," actually the descendants, mainly third and fourth generation, of people who once were or claimed to be refugees, who have been trained from birth to hate Israel, would result in a massive internal insurgency against the state, followed by the occupation of Israel by hostile Arab armies and the probable extermination of its Jewish population. Indeed, there is considerable evidence that this is precisely what most "right of return" advocates have in mind.

It is long overdue for the libel of an Israeli or Zionist "original sin" against the Palestinian Arabs to be discredited, along with the supposed Palestinian Arab "right of return," which is grounded in this false "narrative." There can be no peace between Arabs and Israelis before the lies are dispelled, and people on both sides, as well as the international media, academic experts, the world's governments and international organizations all acknowledge the truth.

The opinions expressed in the comment section are the personal views of the commenters. Comments are moderated, so please keep it civil.

Visitor Comments: 27

(27)
Anonymous,
February 11, 2008 2:12 AM

palestine state never existed

jerusalem mentioned 658 times in hebrew bible, 801 x with new testnone in koran which commands dont turn top their quibla= mizrach indeed when in har habayit they bend to mecca. king david founded it in 1262 b-c jews maintained it for3300 yrs,arabs conquest in 633 b-c lasted just 22 yrs. mohammed never set a foot in it. in 1948 arab leaders urged their people toleave 683000fled and lost the war, close to a million jewish people were forced to leave arab countries .close to 100ooo mill jewish refugees arrived . during jordan occupation jewish holy sites were vandalized and moslems and christian sites were off limit to jews. out of 175 u.n. ecurity councils= 97 vetoed against israel while thousands of arab workers came to work in the land of plishtim. palestine state never existed

(26)
Jennifer,
February 10, 2008 8:53 AM

Just who is a "Palestinian"?

Let us not forget that a lot of "Palestinians" are brand-new residents! How great it must be to move to an area and become an immediate victim.

Even Walid Shoebat, a former PLO terrorist turned Israel friend and supporter, says on his website: Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian? www.shoebat.com

In the BBC documentary "Blaming the Jews," a reporter spoke with boys in a Gaza school, one of whom "inexplicably moved from England" the previous year. So, is the British kid's family now part of the lugubrious cult of "Palestinians"? The answer is.......yes.

This is despicable.

(25)
Reg Saretsky,
February 1, 2008 8:43 AM

There can't be a return of Palestinians to Israel

I feel that both the Palestinians & the Israelis see themselves as such 'totems' of suffering that they both believe the rules of human decency are suspended regarding the 'other'..

This is ironic, seeing how they have so much suffering in common.

Rachel, you are right in that the Jews expelled from Arab lands roughly equaled the Palestinians who fled in 1948 & 1967. This the the BEST argument , & should not be buried.

The Arab world regards the Palestinians as 'pushy, smart, Canaanites that you got to keep in their place' (perhaps secret Baal worshippers to boot ). Or as one Saudi described them at the U of Calgary - "Wannabe Moslems".

Palestinians are kept in camps, rather than resettled by their Arab brothers.

However, very few camps have the amenities you describe .I have known people who worked in the UNRRA camps & the Arab world makes life, socially & economically, hell for Palestinians. They are, by default, a source of underpaid expendable labor without an economic base, or rights of property.

The Muslim world, which ignores the suffering of Jews in the 20 century, proposes an impossible solution - dissolve Israel... Israel is not going to vanish. Both peoples need defensible borders, & secure access to water & an economic base.

A fist step would be a 'Greater Gaza' - allowig settlement in the Sinai as well as the Gaza strip. One can evision a massive reverse osmosis project , powered by a French built & controlled Sinai Nuclear plant, supplying Gaza & southern Israel with power & clean water from the Mediterrean.

The Arab Gulf could finance this, instead of the "Dubai world record tower"...If they ever start to see the Palestinians as real Arabs....

(24)
Dvirah,
January 24, 2008 3:12 PM

Additional Comment(s)

The Israeli "right" of "return" is really the right of all law-abiding Jews to have a place to live in the sovereign Jewish State. It is called "return" because we see this as returning to our ancient and promised homeland. The Arab "right of return", by contrast, demands rights for Palestinian citizens in a foreign (non-Palestinian) country. If the Jews demanded such a right, this would mean demanding of Austria, Germany, Hungary, Poland, etc. that the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Jews deported during the Holocost be given back their old homes and apartments, ousting whoever is now living there. Should the UN support such a demand if we made it? Would not the same grounds for refusal be applicable to the Palestinians? The Palestinians could, of course, institute a similar "right of homeland" in their own sovereign territories - but not in someone else's.I would also call to mind Golda Meir and colleagues standing on the beaches of Haifa pleading with the Arab inhabitants not to leave their homes...this really happened, though none seem now to remember it.

(23)
mwainstein,
January 24, 2008 2:31 PM

they are not entitled to return

he arabs together with alllies Syria, Jordan,Egypt sought to drive the Jews out of their state which was voted ar the UN. WEhere in history are aggresors entitled to return and make demands?An ouitrages request. To this day the arabs and their cvollaboraters are seeking to destroy the state with constant bombardment from Gaza. Leet the arab states who have unllimited land and resources take care of their bretherern .

(22)
Anny Matar,
January 24, 2008 4:38 AM

WE, ISRAEL IS NOT GUILTY AND WE DO NOT HAVE TO EXPRESS ANY

The well oiled Arab propaganda machinery keeps on repeating the wrong done to THEM since 1948 and the more one repeats lies the more it becomes accepted by the world, it's simple "brain washing" and how seccessful they are in it !!!!All the wars Israel has fought against them were NOT started by us but by them.Even now, as I'm writing "kassamim tockets" fly into the Southern part of Israel and they haven't stopped shooting them for SEVEN years !!!! NO ONE in the free world can understand the suffering of people who live there and the uncertainty who'll be the next victim. Which independent country in the world would live with it!!!! but we, in Israel do because we have NO PROPAGANDA and so the world accepts it as a fact, while the Arabs who are shooting these rockets complain against Israel !!!! It's the same as their complaints about refugees. No one forced them out they simply fled and the Arab countries to which they fled DON'T WANT them, they willingly keep them in camps and get money from UNWRA to support them. No one knows whether the moneys ever reaches them, and the more they get the more they want.Israel has within these years integrated thousand of refugees from Arab countries who HAD to find refuge in their historical home Israel. However hard this integration is as most immigrants come with their own cultures, languages and their own ways of life. Everyone finds a home here and no UNWRA is wanted here.!!!!The only thing we urgently need is someone to tell the truth and to stand united before the world, freedom of speech can be most destructive, the Arabs have it much easier THEY MUST SPEAK IN ONE VOICE !!!!Anny MatarIsrael

(21)
Sharona,
January 24, 2008 2:44 AM

This is a wonderful article with very interesting links. The whole world should read it.

(20)
SW,
January 23, 2008 12:14 PM

preaching to the choir

This is an excellent article and Jews need to know these things BUT the people who really need to read and understand the facts in this article are the media, the politicians, and citizens around the world. The Arab views are generally circulated and accepted but ours are not.

What people hear/see on news programs and in newspapers is what they believe, plus what politicians do greatly affects us. Our organizations need to reevaluate their strategies and deal with these realities in a way that will make a difference. I don't think that is being done judging by the results.

(19)
sk,
January 22, 2008 8:33 AM

with or without the agriculture

Should we "return" the land with or without all the beautiful agriculture that is there now? If you look at pictures of Israel before 1948 you will not see much.... Should we plow over everything before we give it back? How about all the infastructure? Need I go on?

(18)
karen elizabeth dahl,
January 22, 2008 5:42 AM

nomadic tribes

the land is the land of ancient nomadic and semi nomadic tribespeoples. there were many tribes, of israel and judea...all have rights, divine rights, of homestead in the lands of judea and israel

(17)
Dvirah,
January 21, 2008 2:30 PM

2 Points

(1) In the 1970's the Israeli Government build 6-7 modern housing estates in the Judea, Sumaria and Gaza areas for the express purpose of resettling the Palestinian refugees out from the "camps" into proper neighborhoods. Arafat put out a pamphlet forbiding any family to move and promising to kill the entire family - including children and kinfolk - if anyone accepted an apartment in the new housing estates. Needless to say no one took the risk that Arafat was bluffing. (These estates were finally opened to general Israeli use after 10 years of standing empty and thus began the Jewish "settlement" of these areas. That is why some Jewish cities are "cheek-by-jowl" with the refugee "camps.")2. Perhaps Ms. Neuwirth felt her list of non-Palestinian refugees was long enough to make her point, but she did leave out all of the African refugees, which is a pity. They, too, should not be forgotten.

(16)
Joe Whitehead,
January 21, 2008 10:33 AM

Absolutely Absurd

It's obvious to everyone whether they admit it or not, the Palestinian return issue is just another front in their war to destoy the Jewish state of Israel. It is a joke for Israel to pay anything to those devils, who will use any money given to them to support their Palestinian terrorism. Let the Arab nations with all the oil and who owes 850,000 Jews for the land they were actually force to leave, pay the terrorism minded Palestinians their so-called compensations! But that would be too politically incorrect for the United Nations against Israel to accept.

(15)
Anonymous,
January 20, 2008 11:51 PM

Israel is an Arab haven-Believe it or not!

Some estimates of the Arab population of Israel go as high as 25%, the progeny of the those who obviously stayed as law-abiding citizens accepting the reality and benefits of Israel. The so-called refugees are those who obeyed the Arab calls to clear out and return safely after Israel had been destroyed (as everybody- even Jews! predicted) by 3 succeeding wars of conquest. This mostly self-exiled population was greatly augmented by paupers bussed in, with UN onnivance,from the slums of confronting Arab states. If the "poor" Palestinians could get Mrs. Arafat to release even part of the billion dollars of Palestinian money salted away in Swiss banks, the "poor" Palestinians could have the same farms and factories that the Israelis have earned since the partition.

(14)
steve,
January 20, 2008 5:53 PM

refuges

the arab armies dropped leaflets saying that arabs should flee from areas to be attacked because all found in thee area will be killed and jew and arab could not be told apart ,when the battle is over the arabs were to return to take back their homes and the ones that jews had lived in.

(13)
Shmuel,
January 20, 2008 4:38 PM

To Anonymous that disagreed

I agree with you, A., that natives should have a right to return (even though any other country in the world gives no such right to anyone; so the current Palistinean right to immigration is the same as any other's rights to anywhere else...but as we said most of these natives are not natives! By the UNWRA definition of these natives, many people have right to return to all kinds of places that they visited as tourists. Crazy no? And also any other country would not let in a great surge of people if it will cause political unrest. I suppose extremist Jews should be screened before entering the country then you would say. And I agree.

(12)
Anonymous,
January 20, 2008 2:43 PM

By hteir definition, WE TOO ARE REFUGEES WITH PRIOR RIGHT OF RETURN

SO SORRY, but using the same logic, we Jews were "ethnically cleansed" from Judea by the Romans (it was the spois of our temple that were used to build the Colosseum in Rome). They calim to be 3rd or 4th generation refugees. So sorry, but we Jews in the Diaspora are many more generational refugees and we have a PRIOR claim to a right of return. It is their ancestors who occupied OUR land.

(11)
EGW,
January 20, 2008 2:20 PM

With friends like these who needs enemies??

It is the mutton-headed comments and opinions of people like # 1, Mr/Mrs "Anonymous, who cause and perpetuate most of the obfuscation about the so-called Arab refugees. They were almost ALL illegal squatters, as the article so rightly and mildly points out. How would they-or ANYONE- get legal ownership to land ALWAY owned by the TURKISH STATE. (ENOUGH has NEVER been made of this fact). That ownership passed, after 1918 to the League of Nations, then to Britain, then very briefly to the UN, then to The state of Israel. The land designated for an Arab State, was rejected by them, and left in abeyance and is now legally "disputed land". It ALL had been designated for "close settlement on the land" for the Jewish People, finalized by the 1923 San Remo Agreement, after 4/5th of the original Jewish intended Mandate had been lopped off and given to an Arab "emir" named Abdullah, son of Hussein of Mecca, Lawrence's friend. It became the emirate (later "kingdom")of Trans-Jordan.What wasn't mentioned, in the article, but implied(also mildly) was that Arabs are the most tremendous liars, often themselves not knowing whether what they'd just invented a few moments before, was fact or fiction, and too self admiring to think about it. After a few repetitions it becomes concrete "FACT". I've seen this myself. When living in Israel I went to Akko to help an Arab neighbour (he owned a beautiful valley) who'd been asked to produce his documentation. It turned out that he, father, wives, children, goats, etc. had been there less than 5 years. Came from Egypt. He'd told me wonderful stories about his ancestors from the time of the Crusades, having lived RIGHT THERE. I fought for him, and was rightly embarrassed. To break the awkward silence, he became (more?)truthful on the way home. For Arabs, truth is what they want it to be,-at THAT moment.

(10)
LES LE GEAR,
January 20, 2008 1:48 PM

Preaching to the choir

Readers like myself and other subscribers as well as any right thinking person know that the refugeeproblem is nothing but a scam. Unfortunately the anti-Semites and their fellow travelers (UN and its agencies, 3rd world countries, the Roman Catholic Church, et. al) along with self-hating Jews, will never be convinced that Israel is the victimof never eding Arab aggression. I know this is just a wish, but Israelshould become self sufficient so that it doesn't need the help of any country, including so-called allies. They should expel it's fifth column Arabs, close border with Gaza, cut off electricity, food,fuel, etc. Rocket attacks by Hamas should be returned in kind on all targets, militray and civilian. They are the enemy and like the Allies did to win WWII, Israel should take all measures to win-to hell with world opinion. The world will never like Israel anyway.

(9)
Anonymous,
January 20, 2008 1:07 PM

I disagree

It is sad, but many Palestinians refugees are indigenous or descendants of indigenous Palestinians. As a Jew, I support their right to live in the land of their fathers and mothers on the same logic that I support the right of every Jew to return to Israel. The problem is the hate; how to get rid of the hate....on both sides. I don't have an answer, but barring "natives" from their land is wrong.

(8)
Lar,
January 20, 2008 12:51 PM

Let the other Arab States step up

The Palestinian people have been and continue to be pawns of the Arabic countries. What was(and really is)a large group of Middle Eastern countries bent on destroying tiny Israel (only two governments recognize Israel)is now the big bad Israelis bullying the poor Palestinians. Let the oil rich, terrorist supporting countries of the Middle East take in the Palestinians. After all, the Palestinians family's former real property doesn't exist anymore. The Israelis have turned the decrepit desert shacks into modern technological wonders. Isn't it eally about the Palestinians getting a "piece of the action"? Isn't it really about money?

(7)
Marsha G.,
January 20, 2008 12:32 PM

Well put

Let's face it. If the arabs really wanted to solve the problem, they would have built housing for the so-called refugees in the years between 1948 and 1967. It is in the arabs best interest to keep this "refugee" thing going. They have no interest in peace, only the demise of Israel.

(6)
Howard Newman,
January 20, 2008 11:47 AM

See Mr Reid's comment

As Bob Reid said "Now let the world know'' It's not enough to preach to the choir. For a people who are supposed to control the media we have done an extremley poor job of tellng our own story. How ironic is that?

Palestinian refusgeism is not something of a racket. It's the ultimate racket; an invention of the wealthy and cynnical Arab elite (who could have solved this problem 60 years ago if they carred a wit about their fellow Arabs), predicated on their intuitive knowlege of Western anti-semitism and Jewish liberal guilt. The so called Palestinians are straw mean created by the enemies of Isreal and perpetuated by the useful idiots of the liberal western press.

We know that is the truth. So what are we going to do about it!

(5)
Betsy Penn,
January 20, 2008 11:44 AM

lies

it's so interesting to me that the world hears almost nothing of the Jewish refugees who were expelled from arab countries and how all their property and money was confiscated, and how the Jews were treated by the muslems in those countries. any real facts that trickle through seem to fall on deaf ears! the world seems to love its lies. It's very sad how they run to conclusions that demonize the Jews. sad for the Jews? maybe not, in the End. sad for the ones who are being so willingly deceived, YES.

(4)
Anonymous,
January 20, 2008 11:31 AM

send to condi and w

can this article b sent to condi and her supposed boss? can it b published in any newspaper who totally supports Israel?the truth must out and it is time as i read in another article that the burden of 'doing the right thing' is shifted to the pa and other sidewhy must israel have the burden when it is not the aggressor We have paid in young lives time and time againit is time to say 'no' to the road map or any other map that wishes us off the face of the map thank u for this article !

(3)
Anonymous,
January 20, 2008 10:37 AM

Olmert's thinking

So why is Olmert so interested in helping them with their "right of return?

(2)
Bob Reid,
January 20, 2008 8:57 AM

Well Said

Now let the world know.

(1)
Anonymous,
January 20, 2008 8:53 AM

I find this very informative.

In reading these facts, I have a much better understanding of what really going on, and am able to pray with a better knowledge of what Gods chosen children really endured & are still enduring. Thank-you.... Bob C.

We have a canistel (or eggfruit) tree our backyard which we’d like to get rid of. We do not eat its fruit, and the fruit and leaves make a constant mess. I haven’t found anyone who is interested in its fruit – even to take it from us for free. I would like to replace it with an orange tree (we live in Miami). Is there any problem doing so?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

The Torah actually writes specifically that we may not cut down fruit trees (Deuteronomy 20:19-20). From this the Sages learn a more general principle that one may not purposelessly waste or destroy anything of value – food, good utensils, clothes, etc. (see e.g. Talmud Baba Kama 91b, Shabbat 140b).

The Talmud (Baba Kama 91-92) distinguishes that whenever there is a legitimate reason, one may cut down a fruit tree – if it damages other trees or plants, if it’s not productive and not worth its upkeep, if it’s more valuable for the wood, etc. The commentators include in this dispensation when ones needs the space the tree is growing on (Rosh Baba Kama 8:15).

There is, however, a frightening line in the Talmud there which makes people much more hesitant to rely on the above leniency. Rabbi Chanina stated that his son died young as a punishment for his cutting a fig tree before its time. Thus apart from the legal issue of destroying a productive tree, this law appears to carry with it severe Divine retribution.

Most authorities explain that this punishment is incurred only if a person cuts down a fruit tree without legitimate reason, but there is a minority opinion that it is incurred even if the tree is cut with good reason.

As a result, even in cases where a legitimate reason applies, people generally take an extra precaution of first selling the tree to a non-Jew, and having a non-Jew do the actual cutting. (The entire prohibition does not apply to non-Jews.) Your case is also better in that you are cutting one fruit tree to plant another, more productive one. Even with all of this, it’s preferable, if possible, to leave a part of the original tree intact.

In 1942, Hitler devised a plan for a Museum of Judaism, to remember the dead Jewish religion, culture and people. Millions of Jewish treasures -- Torah scrolls, ritual objects, books and art -- were looted by the Nazis and taken to warehouses. In Czechoslovakia, the objects were taken to the Jewish Museum in Prague, where the Jews themselves were forced to sort, label, and pack the items for use in the Nazi's future museum. After the war, many of these items were recovered, including thousands of Torah scrolls and nearly one million books. These were distributed to Jewish communities worldwide, as a living testimony to the indestructibility of the Jewish people.

One who humiliates another person in public ... even though he may be a scholar and may have done many good deeds, nevertheless loses his portion in the eternal world (Ethics of the Fathers 3:15).

Imagine a situation: you have a fine home, a well-paying job, a comfortable car, and a substantial retirement annuity. If you do a single thoughtless act, you will lose everything you have worked to achieve: home, job, car, and savings. What kind of precautions would you take to avoid even the remotest possibility of incurring such a disaster? Without doubt, you would develop an elaborate system of defenses to assure that this event would never occur.

The Talmud tells us that everything we have worked for during our entire lives can be forfeited in one brief moment of inconsideration: we embarrass another person in public. Perhaps we may say something insulting or make a demeaning gesture. Regardless of how it occurs, the Talmud states that if we cause another person to turn pale because of being humiliated in public, we have committed the equivalent of bloodshed.

Still, we allow our tongues to wag so easily. If we give serious thought to the words of the Talmud, we would exercise the utmost caution in public and be extremely sensitive to other people's feelings, lest an unkind word or degrading gesture deprive us of all our spiritual merits.

Today I shall...

try to be alert and sensitive to other people's feelings and take utmost caution not to cause anyone to feel humiliated.

With stories and insights,
Rabbi Twerski's new book Twerski on Machzor makes Rosh Hashanah prayers more meaningful. Click here to order...